Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANxcAMs_1r0xz=D4bZ9C0k+gdkfrP=DJR0r97G1hG=nUKzKrcw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20180122162452.8756-1-alban@kinvolk.io> <20180122162452.8756-3-alban@kinvolk.io>
 <20180124175234.GA29811@mail.hallyn.com> <1516881401.3751.37.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <1517243585.29187.546.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CANxcAMs_1r0xz=D4bZ9C0k+gdkfrP=DJR0r97G1hG=nUKzKrcw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Dongsu Park <dongsu@kinvolk.io>
Date:   Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:13:05 +0100
Message-ID: <CANxcAMs1A_s-i=vDRfcYqi_149hkS47V3iaJzxdMNgzUyRS7GA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/2] ima: force re-appraisal on filesystems with FS_IMA_NO_CACHE
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
        Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@gmail.com>,
        Alban Crequy <alban@kinvolk.io>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Iago_L=C3=B3pez_Galeiras?= <iago@kinvolk.io>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com>,
        James Morris <james.l.morris@oracle.com>,
        Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Dongsu Park <dongsu@kinvolk.io> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 5:33 PM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2018-01-25 at 06:56 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
...
>> Did you get a chance to make the change and test it?
>
> Alban has been on holidays, so he will be back on Wednesday or so.
> So I'll try to understand what you meant in the last email.
>
> As IMA_DONE_MASK contains all other bitmasks, it's possible to
> optimize the code like this:
>
>         if (test_and_clear_bit(IMA_CHANGE_XATTR, &iint->atomic_flags)) {
>                 iint->flags &= ~IMA_DONE_MASK;
>         } else if (inode->i_sb->s_type->fs_flags & FS_IMA_NO_CACHE) {
>                 iint->flags &= ~IMA_DONE_MASK;
>                 if (action & IMA_MEASURE)
>                         iint->measured_pcrs = 0;
>         }
>
> Is that what you want to see? Please let me know if it's not.
> Tomorrow I will try to test with a new patch.

Today I created a new patch, and tested it. It worked fine.
So I've just sent a new patchset v4. Please see:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1598387.html

Thanks,
Dongsu

> Thanks,
> Dongsu
>
>> Mimi
>>